State v. Mendoza

OPINION

EHRLICH, Judge.

Hilario H. Mendoza (“defendant”) appeals from his conviction and sentence for aggravated driving under the influence of liquor (“DUI”). Specifically, he requests a new trial, arguing that his rights to trial by jury and to appeal, as well as his due-process rights, were violated by the lack of a transcript of communications between a deaf juror and the court-appointed, sign-language interpreter. Because there was no constitutional error, we affirm.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On June 13, 1994, the defendant was charged with aggravated DUI, a class 5 felony. One of the…